We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Mbna redress calculation
AndyG2565
Posts: 4 Newbie
In december 2016 i asked to check the redress amount they had given me in 2009 regarding two credit cards. They replied saying they believe their calculations were correct.
Has anyone had any dealings and could provide any useful comment?
Andy
Has anyone had any dealings and could provide any useful comment?
Andy
0
Comments
-
-
Why would they reply differently?In december 2016 i asked to check the redress amount they had given me in 2009 regarding two credit cards. They replied saying they believe their calculations were correct.
Do you have evidence that the calculations were somehow incorrect? If not, you are wasting everyone's time with a non-complaint.0 -
I read an article dated 28 December 2016 on The Telegraph amongst other news sites which stated MBNA didn't take into account overlimit fees etc caused by the addition of PPI to credit card account. Hence I asked them to check their calculation. They have replied saying they calculated it correctly but I made no mention of overlimit fees when I spoke with them so I intend to contact them again and ask that specifically0
-
I kept my query simple on purpose, yes as I have said the potential miscalculation has been reported in the media over recent years. I don't see how it's a waste of time. If you're referring to your time no one forced you to reply0
-
Why are you adopting this position exactly? Why didn't you ask them from the outset to check if there were over limit fees imposed as a direct result of PPI?They have replied saying they calculated it correctly but I made no mention of overlimit fees when I spoke with them so I intend to contact them again and ask that specifically
I was referring to your time and the Bank's. As you say, my own time is irrelevant since I give it freely-usually helping far more deserving cases.I don't see how it's a waste of time. If you're referring to your time no one forced you to reply
You won't get any further with this unless you have your own evidence. Do you really expect the Bank to answer differently just because you word your question more specifically?
Remember that "he who asserts must prove", so it's not for the Bank to provide proof that your accusations don't have validity.
A non-complaint based on a poorly written and researched newspaper article,I'm afraid.
Anyone disadvantaged by Overlimit fees imposed as a direct result of mis-sold PPI will be contacted automatically.
Sorry.0 -
I read an article dated 28 December 2016 on The Telegraph amongst other news sites which stated MBNA didn't take into account overlimit fees etc caused by the addition of PPI to credit card account. Hence I asked them to check their calculation. They have replied saying they calculated it correctly but I made no mention of overlimit fees when I spoke with them so I intend to contact them again and ask that specifically
Sorry you won't get anywhere with this. You going over limit is caused by your own spending, not the PPI. PPI was typically charged in the region of 70p per £100 of debt. If you could prove the addition of the PPI was the only reason you went over, you might get somewhere but that's very unlikely.
Imagine that you have a card with £1000 limit
You spend £1000
You pay the minimum (say 1%) which is £10
PPI is calculated on the balance remaining £990 = approx £7
You are thus still £3 under limit. When your interest is added on you may well be over limit and the bank is required to refund any interest on the PPI that you paid the next month which might be what you are getting mixed up with but the over limit fee is not caused by the PPISam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0 -
-
Very informative, thank you0
-
That post was started 4 years ago and appears to have twisted from the original purpose to issues with PPI claims (not complaints) - if it was flagged 4 years ago that they were getting stuff wrong and not following the official guidelines it would have been fixed by now.
All you can do is forward it to the FOS with your explanation as to why you think it's wrongSam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.3K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards